tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.comments2018-02-21T19:05:42.450-05:00Law at the End of the DayLarry Catá Backerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06545101367530775497noreply@blogger.comBlogger397125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-82852866659784712642017-12-08T01:22:56.773-05:002017-12-08T01:22:56.773-05:00hi greatly respectable artical,Law firm in Banglad...hi greatly respectable artical,<a href="http://www.alaminrahman.com/" rel="nofollow">Law firm in Bangladesh</a> continue doing wonderful.Alamin Rahmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05194748124907731200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-17149558520279262542017-11-28T14:47:36.166-05:002017-11-28T14:47:36.166-05:00Bravo for exploring this important issue.Bravo for exploring this important issue.Rob Prechthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13035638670904030487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-415997478309496122017-11-22T14:50:44.200-05:002017-11-22T14:50:44.200-05:00PS. The 29 also deals, basically, with the same su...PS. The 29 also deals, basically, with the same subject. I think it would be interesting to put items 5 and 29 together in an ample and enlightening 1. A good introductory item.Betita Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06915403730048630508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-1508078201181593132017-11-22T12:28:43.950-05:002017-11-22T12:28:43.950-05:00Dear Larry and Flora, I considered the proposal of...Dear Larry and Flora, I considered the proposal of the Project is very good and I liked the suggestions for changes that you both propose.<br />My suggestion, for you, is a small change, which can be considered as an addendum.<br />According to the project, &quot;Violations of environmental rights and environmental damages ignore distinctions of ethnicity, gender, age, social or economic status.&quot;<br />For this reason, I think Article 5 should be Article 1, with the somewhat broader text.<br /><br />1- The entire State has a legal obligation to widely disseminate to its citizens what are considered to be &quot;environmental damages&quot; within the scope of the Draft Guidelines on Human Rights and the Environment, their consequences, and what the consequences will be if they occur.<br /><br />Because: each individual has a particular worldview; many people are misinformed and do not have a systemic vision of the environment where we live; only what has been widely warned should be charged; although we may think that everyone knows the importance of preserving the environment and human rights, not all people know.<br /><br />I apologize to you both for my arrogance to make suggestions for your work, which I considered very good. But I always defend that in the first place comes the exhaustive disclosure of the necessary information. Then comes the rules.<br /><br /><br /><br />Caros Larry e Flora, considerei a proposta do Projeto muito boa e gostei das sugestões de mudanças que vocês propõem.<br />Minha sugestão, para vocês, é uma pequena alteração, que pode ser considerada mais um adendo.<br />De acordo com o projeto: &quot;Violações de direitos ambientais e danos ambientais ignoram distinções de etnia, gênero, idade, status social ou econômico&quot;.<br />Por este motivo, penso que o Artigo 5 deveria ser o Artigo 1, com o texto um pouco mais amplo.<br />1-Todo o Estado tem obrigação legal de divulgar amplamente para os seus cidadãos o que são considerados “danos ambientais” , no âmbito do Projeto de Diretrizes sobre Direitos Humanos e Meio Ambiente, as consequências deles e quais serão as consequências caso eles ocorram.<br />Isso porque: cada indivíduo tem uma visão de mundo particular; muitas pessoas são desinformadas e não tem uma visão sistema do meio onde vivemos; somente deve ser cobrado aquilo que foi amplamente avisado; embora nós possamos pensar que todo mundo sabe a importância de preservar o meio ambiente e os direitos humanos, nem todas as pessoas sabem.<br />Peço desculpas para vocês pela minha arrogância de fazer sugestões para o trabalho de vocês, que eu considerei muito bom. Mas sempre defendo que em primeiro lugar vem a divulgação exaustiva das informações necessárias. Depois as regras. <br />Betita Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06915403730048630508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-10097950528783130292017-10-31T01:59:45.252-04:002017-10-31T01:59:45.252-04:00Well-thought out analysis.Well-thought out analysis.Joelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-28148602476749725132017-10-08T22:13:44.760-04:002017-10-08T22:13:44.760-04:00The article &quot;不能让算法决定内容&quot; is the first one...The article &quot;不能让算法决定内容&quot; is the first one of the People&#39;s Daily&#39;s trilogy on the algorithm. The other two articles can be found through the links below (both in Chinese only):<br />the second article 别被算法困在“信息茧房”<br />http://opinion.people.com.cn/n1/2017/0919/c1003-29544724.html<br />the third article 警惕算法走向创新的反面<br />http://opinion.people.com.cn/n1/2017/0920/c1003-29545718.html<br /><br />Miaoqiang Daihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05638661322575669940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-51568929794383326462017-05-29T10:59:33.608-04:002017-05-29T10:59:33.608-04:00thanksthanksAdriana Ryleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16945480422986632992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-50692314323660606502017-03-02T02:27:05.930-05:002017-03-02T02:27:05.930-05:00Agreed, and while a large segment of the US citize...Agreed, and while a large segment of the US citizenry senses an America in relative decline (and IMO correctly sensing), the changes needed to make &quot;America Great Again&quot; requires both engagement (i.e., TPP, etc) and an acknowledgement that the prosperity of today cannot simply be based upon the framework of an earlier era. Maybe Trump intuitively knows this. Given that others are challenging the existing governance framework - and the US is losing its dominance - Trump is right inasmuch as the US could potentially change the rules of the game that it apparently is now losing. The question of course is whether time and ability will enable the US to change the rules of the game or whether the die is cast. This indeed is &quot;revolutionary&quot;.Joelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-87446414506516945002016-11-21T10:35:50.182-05:002016-11-21T10:35:50.182-05:00Thanks Larry! This means a lot coming from you!Thanks Larry! This means a lot coming from you!Tara Van Hohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17663283210206215476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-87088933752262052492016-11-03T03:54:15.493-04:002016-11-03T03:54:15.493-04:00Thanks..
Mutlak Butlan
HukukThanks..<br><br /><a href="http://www.mutlakbutlan.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Mutlak Butlan</b></a><br /><a href="http://www.mutlakbutlan.com/search/label/hukuk" rel="nofollow"><b>Hukuk</b></a>Numan G. Ayanoğluhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17021973179896758518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-81359539233023123472016-10-05T06:43:26.945-04:002016-10-05T06:43:26.945-04:00Very nice article . Thank you for sharing. This ar...Very nice article . Thank you for sharing. This article is very much helpful to understand <a href="paysquare.com/statutory-compliance/" rel="nofollow">legal complience</a> aishwaryakamat17https://www.blogger.com/profile/08524472080032134194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-61217002231038624922016-09-29T17:42:20.023-04:002016-09-29T17:42:20.023-04:00Thank a lotThank a lotjohnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-5067299812594946972016-09-05T07:10:39.691-04:002016-09-05T07:10:39.691-04:00Besides the Charter of the UN, where it comes to &...Besides the Charter of the UN, where it comes to &#39;Military intervention in International Law&#39;, Article VIII of the CWC confirms your statement. <br /><br />35. &#39;The Executive Council shall consider any issue or matter within its competence affecting this Convention and its implementation, including concerns regarding compliance, and cases of non-compliance, and, as appropriate, inform States Parties and bring the issue or matter to the attention of the Conference.<br /><br />36. In its consideration of doubts or concerns regarding compliance and cases of non-compliance, including, inter alia, abuse of the rights provided for under this Convention, the Executive Council shall consult with the States Parties involved and,as appropriate, request the State Party to take measures to redress the situation within a specified time. To the extent that the Executive Council considers further action to be necessary, it shall take, inter alia, one or more of the following measures:<br />(a) Inform all States Parties of the issue or matter;<br />(b) Bring the issue or matter to the attention of the Conference;<br />(c) Make recommendations to the Conference regarding measures to redress the situation and to ensure compliance.<br />The Executive Council shall, in cases of particular gravity and urgency, bring the issue or matter, including relevant information and conclusions, directly to the attention of the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council. It shall at the same time inform all States Parties of this step&#39;.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-7355886645080285402016-08-17T18:10:32.594-04:002016-08-17T18:10:32.594-04:00Flora,
My understanding of the article is that Zh...Flora, <br />My understanding of the article is that Zhou Ruijin agrees with you that the Cultural Revolution cannot be forgotten. Zhou says that China has not had the thorough examination of the Cultural Revolution needed to understand it and then to reject it. Rejecting it doesn&#39;t mean forgetting it. Certainly people reject the Holocaust without forgetting it. <br /><br />This is passage says it I think: &quot;Therefore, when we speak about reform, we cannot avoid discussing the Cultural Revolution. Not only is it unavoidable but it is inseparable from any discussion of reform. The end of the Cultural Revolution essentially put an end to the class struggle that had divided Chinese society. For a long period following the end of the Cultural Revolution there was a broad consensus in Chinese society against the Cultural Revolution – kind of like the greatest common factor in arithmetic. Further deepening of reform was a quest for the greatest common denominator.<br /><br />But was the Cultural Revolution actually rejected in its entirety? To get at that question we must ask if society made a deep and thorough reflection upon the nature of the Cultural Revolution itself. Absent a deep examination of the nature of the Cultural Revolution, it cannot be rejected in its entirety. Reflection on some aspects of the Cultural Revolution was avoided. There always arose the question of how to reject it and to just what degree to reject it. The differing views on the Cultural Revolution that we have been hearing in recent years reflect that.&quot;<br /><br />Regards,<br />David CowhigGao Daweihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14426692980956981629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-36380893295603822962016-06-04T22:33:08.325-04:002016-06-04T22:33:08.325-04:00Larry, Many thanks for your contribution to this e...Larry, Many thanks for your contribution to this effort and for the link to my blogpost. I&#39;ve been the liaison person with the Supreme People&#39;s Court on this. I had given comments on an earlier draft of the interpretation about one year ago, and met the drafting team then. Susan Finderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04713694794299486807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-77784295147837624672016-05-19T07:28:42.988-04:002016-05-19T07:28:42.988-04:00Thanks for writing.Thanks for writing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-20443552337272781372016-03-08T07:59:28.824-05:002016-03-08T07:59:28.824-05:00Mr Zhang said: Relatively few observers or policym...Mr Zhang said: Relatively few observers or policymakers, however, seem to entertain the possibility that Chinese elites are ideological creatures, or even that they may be dealing with an ideological population. <br />It seems none of the commentators addressed this statement. <br />It is unclear whether Mr. Zhang is using the statement as a strawman for his argument or is not well informed, or only is acquainted with a certain generation of observers. The long term China observers/policymakers of my acquaintance have always been aware of the importance of ideology in China. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-88012878700602033382016-02-26T15:29:57.874-05:002016-02-26T15:29:57.874-05:00We are at a crucial stage in legal reform, and Law...We are at a crucial stage in legal reform, and Law and Development theory postulated that China would embark upon a trajectory of change different from the path legal development has taken in the real world. This fact alone could raise many difficult questions. As this is a response to Jerry Cohen&#39;s opinion piece and Larry Backer&#39;s comments, this is perhaps not the best site where an answer to these questions may be attempted.<br /><br />I will conclude this comment by saying that using theory to predict which path to development a legal system will walk is always very, very difficult. This difficulty does not stem from Law and Development Theory itself. It does not stem from any flaws of this theory. A theory that has survived for more or less forty years of continuous tests and criticism is, as facts prove, a theory which is useful and good. Neither does this problem stems from us – all those who out of intellectual curiosity chose to study how law is in China – or from any limitations in our field.<br /><br />The difficulty of predicting what will happen in China&#39;s legal system ten years from now stems from a problem of an entirely different order. This problem was first raised by David Hume. Is is a problem to which the greatest minds of Western and Eastern philosophy have given only tentative solutions. This problem has a specific name. In Philosophy, it is known as the Problem of Induction. But that, perhaps, must remain the topic of a different discussion, one more suited to my teaching in Methodology.Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-75439427321406092152016-02-26T15:29:51.623-05:002016-02-26T15:29:51.623-05:00It is always difficult to add something new to any...It is always difficult to add something new to any essay written by Jerome Cohen. I still have a vivid memory of the day when – as a student in Italy – I accidentally found The Criminal Process in the People&#39;s Republic of China, 1949–63: An Introduction in the academic library where I used to work. Many years later, I would be invited to visit New York University School of Law, where I spent four fantastic and extremely enlightening weeks giving talks, and doing research side by side with the greatest names in the field of China Law Studies.<br /><br />Five years after my visit to New York University School of Law, things have changed, and we have entered a different stage of legal reform. Until 1978, a time when legal legal reform was proceeding at a much slower pace than today, the effects of change could be felt mostly within China&#39;s borders only. Today, China has become a global player, one which soon will play an even more significant role in shaping global norms. This fact alone justifies the close attention foreigners are paying to each one of the events that are taking place in different areas of China&#39;s legal system as I write. We live in a highly interdependent world, and the dynamics active in China&#39;s financial system, property market, and in each one of the other areas of the law, will no doubt set in motion similar processes elsewhere. A butterfly flapping its wings in Beijing can cause a hurricane in the European Union, America, Australia, or anywhere else in the world. This is neither rhetoric not metaphor, but one of the most important scientific truths discovered by American Mathematician Edward Lorenz. <br /><br />The field of China Law Studies has always been highly pluralistic, and interdisciplinary. An easy categorization would be one that divided the field between the “Optimists”, and “Pessimists”, classifying the style, topic, and personal preferences of each scholar under neatly drawn categories. Beyond such an easy (and perhaps artificial) categorization, and all the differences in methodology, nationality, topic of research that exist, a minimum common denominator can be found.<br /><br />Jerry Cohen&#39;s article refers to this minimum common denominator in an indirect way, and I am taking upon myself the task of explaining what this minimum common denominator is, and why it is useful. Jerry Cohen&#39;s reference are indirect because knowledge about this minimum common denominator is shared by all those who work in the field of China Law Studies. Therefore, the minimum common denominator does not need to be mentioned in an explicit way – it is an integral part of our worldview. It is something all of us know in a very good way.<br /><br />To oversimplify a very large and complex body of theory (and perhaps even popularize it, since I am writing for a broad audience), the beliefs we all share are that:<br /><br />(1) Law is an engine of development, broadly understood.<br />(2) The &#39;vanguard&#39; of legal development – where my use of this term refers to someone who opens up a new road, and has got no other political connotation – is given by all those who practice law, in different ways.<br /><br />Law and Development theory has been criticized on many different grounds. Some critics, particularly the most virulent ones, have displayed a greater talent in working on the pars destruens, than on the pars construens of their critique. If we are to make sense of the world around us, if we are to understand what direction legal reform is taking in China, we need a framework of reference. Despite its flaws, the framework provided by Law and Development theory is the one most widely shared and adopted.<br /><br />This does not mean that the framework is perfect. As Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn taught us, science – a broad designation which includes not only the hard sciences, but the social sciences as well – is made by testing and revising theories. Sometimes, these theories may work flawlessly, and yield accurate predictions. But, other times they may yield predictions that differ from reality.<br /><br />Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-40229575851905897512016-02-15T22:10:47.760-05:002016-02-15T22:10:47.760-05:00It is with a heavy heart that my friend and simply...It is with a heavy heart that my friend and simply a good ol country boy has walked on. I first met and worked with Bill at the Sac and fox Nation. He was the Attorney General and I was the Director of Real Estate. We both testified together before the U.S. Senate Investigating Committee on Indian Affairs during the turbulent P.L. 638 program. He was a master at legal strategies and a superb legal scholar. But mostly he was my friend. Great spirit, take care of a great man.<br /><br />Jim WelshGhost Traderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09747599536892347642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-21228064393569427852016-02-15T12:10:58.610-05:002016-02-15T12:10:58.610-05:00A great mind and a great spirit. He will be sorely...A great mind and a great spirit. He will be sorely missed in Indian Country.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-67571096366290086032015-10-02T18:06:37.390-04:002015-10-02T18:06:37.390-04:00“At all times the Party gives top priority to the ...“At all times the Party gives top priority to the interests of the people,” /“党在任何时候都把群众利益放在第一 位”<br /><br />The interest of the People is a “top priority”, or something that has to be “at the first place” (第一 位) but, it is not the sole interest the Party has to serve. The interest of the nation (para 17) comes next. <br /><br />Para 26 was amended in 2007, with the inclusion of Hu Jintao&#39;s Three Sentences: <br /><br />- persist in exercising power for the people,<br />- showing concern for the people<br />- working for the interest of the people.<br /><br />The first sentence and third sentence can be understood as referring to political representation under a Leninist framework. The second sentence cannot. Displays of concern are not necessary to use power, or to work in the interest of the people either. The earlier parts of para 26 are: sharing weal and woe, maintaining the closest possible ties, not allowing members to become divorced from the masses, or placing themselves above them. None of these seems to imply an element of obligation or of sole trust. <br /><br />Vanguardism may rest on something more than obligation, duty or trust. Vanguardism may rests on <br /><br />(1) a complete identity between the Party and the masses;<br />(2) necessity.<br /><br />The Party and the People are of one and the same kind, and share the same nature. This is obvious, given that the CCP is composed by persons belonging to various sectors of Chinese society, and Party members are chosen among the “advanced elements” (article 1) of the Chinese people. Their political progressiveness is sufficient to justify their vanguard role. But, aside from their political qualities, in principle nothing should distinguish Party members from the Chinese people. <br /><br />Historical necessity does the rest, and justifies the need for a vanguard. <br /><br />The mass line principle can come to life only if Party members do not change their nature as “ordinary members of the working people”. (article 2). In representing the People, Party members are representing themselves. The dialectical process involved in the mass line is a feedback process among peers, and can exist only if a process of mutual identification is at play.<br /><br />This feedback process no longer works when the vanguard their nature, becomes something other than it is, no longer counts as one of the People, and therefore cannot be counted upon as an advanced element. [Corruption = corrumpere = etc., the Chinese &#39;fubai&#39; conveys the same idea.] More than failing in one&#39;s duty, this is a failure to conform to one&#39;s nature and to cultivate oneself. A heavy element of Confucian morality is involved here. Broadly speaking, in Confucian thought the moral order corresponds to the natural order and viceversa. Therefore it is no surprise that the Party considers maintaining a good Leninist moral order essential for its survival, and the prosperity of the nation. <br /><br />Most of the last sentence of para 26 (establish a sound system for punishing and preventing corruption by fighting it in a comprehensive way, addressing both its symptoms and root cause and combining punishment with prevention, with the emphasis on prevention) has been lifted verbatim from the XVI Congress&#39; political line on corruption. <br /><br />This is interesting, because it gives an idea of the relative importance of political lines as “establishing a sound system” and the Four Basic Principles. We don&#39;t know much about how the CCP Statute is amended but, there must have been a lot of work behind the decision to place “establishing a sound system” exactly in para 26. This makes me think of Schleiermacher&#39;s systematic coherence, and how theory obscures as much as it illuminates. Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-49345418313667806322015-09-19T18:20:19.882-04:002015-09-19T18:20:19.882-04:00The CCP is not only a vanguard, but also the core ...The CCP is not only a vanguard, but also the core of leadership. A core is a nucleus, the central part of something else – in this case the core of leadership is the central part of leadership. The non-central part of leadership will be the “working class, the people and the nation”. Here the Statute implies that leadership does not exclusively belong to the CCP per se, but to “the working class, the people and the nation” too. The CCP may be at the forefront of leadership (vanguard role), yet the “masters of the country” are the people (para 15). The CCP and the people play complementary roles, with the CCP drawing its legitimacy and its very existence from the Chinese people. <br /><br />The CCP represents the fundamental interest of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people. Here “fundamental” modifies the meaning of the noun interest, and refers to those interests that are the most important for the people, to their basic interest. Para 1 states that political representation involves the basic interest of the people. Beyond the basic interest, other kinds of interests may exist, which are accidental, nonessential and lie outside the scope of political representation, if and only if they are not relevant to the goals of the CCP. <br /><br />The overwhelming majority of the Chinese people includes the highest possible number of persons, but not their totality. This may or may not mean that there is room for the CCP to expand the scope of its political representation to those who are included in the totality of the people but not in the “overwhelming majority”. The criterion whereby political representation can be enjoyed is not specified. Are multinational corporations, foreign companies, foreign NGOs, and foreign citizens represented by the CCP, or are their rights and interests protected through means other than political representation?<br /> <br />“The realization of communism is the highest ideal and ultimate goal of the Party.” The last sentence of para 1 underwent various changes in time...this is the most interesting sentence of para 1 and perhaps the entire statute. The CCP represents almost the entire totality of Chinese citizens and the Chinese diaspora but, does being represented by the CCP entail an individual or even a communal committment to the realization of communism? This is an ideal and an ultimate goal that belongs to the Party and to those who accept its program and therefore choose to bind themselves to the CCP (See articles 1 and 2). The Party is indeed the vanguard and the core leader of the people but, it is distinct from them. While the ideals and goals of the Party need to be compatible with those of the people (and viceversa), an absolute identity between the goals and the Party and the goals of the people is not a prerequisite for the realization of communism. The Statute creates various spaces of autonomy, and it would be interesting to know how many people have noticed the existence of such spaces...Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-26067808353191968982015-09-15T18:00:53.537-04:002015-09-15T18:00:53.537-04:00Representing (代表) and serving the People. Or: does...Representing (代表) and serving the People. Or: does the vanguard Party have obligations towards the people, the state and the nation? The word &#39;obligation&#39; never appears in the General Program. What one can find is yaoqiu 要求, which they translate as &#39;requirement&#39;. I will stick to this translation. Translations of political-legal documents are performed really carefully, by large teams of translators, and they undergo several checks – someone told me. The choice of “requirement” must be deliberate, and perhaps motivated by the fact that “requirement” best conveys the meaning of yaoqiu 要求. Is a requirement the same thing as an obligation? This is not an otiose question. Let me state it differently。<br /><br />Is political representation a prior condition for achieving the goals set by the General Program, or it is something that results from the CCP having bound itself to the People? <br /><br />According to paragraphs 26-30, there are four fundamental requirements the CCP must meet to build itself. The Three Represents is part of the first requirement (para 27) – adhering to the Party&#39;s basic line but, it is not itself a fundamental requirement, or a basic principle. Rather it operates side by side with the four basic principles. Serving the People on the other hand is among the fundamental requirements, or four basic principles. <br /><br /><br />Emancipating the mind. This is the most common translation of jiefang sixiang. 解放思想. But, in different contexts jiefang is translated as “to liberate”, “liberation” and “sixiang” is either “thought” or “ideology”. Emancipating the mind of course conveys an idea which is very similar to the idea of “liberating ideology”, not being bound by the constraints of ideology, but in a much more indirect way. <br /><br />The most interesting question is what does it mean to represent. To this question, I have neither answers nor hypotheses for. Neither did I have the time to check whether commentators other have elaborated on the concept of daibiao/representation. Within a Leninist framework, representation by leadership is consistent with all the other premises of the ideological framework but, other and equally coherent possibilities may exist.Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24800874.post-79421037863039459172015-09-15T18:00:42.749-04:002015-09-15T18:00:42.749-04:00I thought I should explain how I read political/le...I thought I should explain how I read political/legal documents, and I started writing a post about this on my blog, but then I stopped because I felt it was becoming too theoretical and too soon. Hermeneutical theories can be of limited usefulness when applied to the CCP Statute or any other political/legal document, largely because the considerations and/or goals that their authors may have had in mind may not be the same goals I have in mind when I approach a political/legal document.<br /><br />Anyhow, here&#39;s what caught my attention in paragraph 6 of the General Program. <br /><br />The Sange Daibiao as an &#39;important thought&#39;. Paragraph 2 lists Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, the Three Represents and the Scientific Outlook on Development chronologically. But, notice how each one of them is qualified in a different way. Marxism-Leninism is an ideology, a zhuyi. Mao Zedong thought is a thought, a sixiang. Deng Xiaoping theory is merely a theory, while the Three Represents is an **<br />*important thought***, a zhongyao sixiang...and, it is mentioned in the second sentence of paragraph 1. In the 1992 and 1997 versions of the General Program, para 1 had it <br /><br />“The CCP is the vanguard of the Chinese working class and the faithful representative of the interest of the people of all ethnicities of China. It is the core of leadership for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics” (I am not looking at earlier versions of the General Program, for now). <br /><br />The 2002 amendment added the three different entities that the CCP now represents, thus placing the Three Represents before all previous ideologies. The amendment to paragraph 1 is coherent with the goal to understand “what socialism ***is***”。 There is also a little noticed transnational element to political representation by the CCP:<br /><br />“The CCP is the vanguard of....the Chinese people and the Chinese nation”.<br /><br />The Chinese people and the Chinese nation are distinct. The scope of the first is delimited by notions of citizenship and residence, while the scope of the second is not. <br /><br /><br />Flora Sapiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250645073192153144noreply@blogger.com